Visionaries Part Deaux

[Barzilla]

Doctor Robert and myself have spent our energy trying to forge a new way of analyzing the Rockets. We call it visionary. You may call it something else. Basically, these are the assumptions I have as a visionary:

1. The goal of every NBA team is to win championships.
2. Teams that win the championship play a style of basketball that maximizes the talents of its best player.
3. Teams that win the championship surround that player with players who compliment his talents.

For example, if you looked at the Rockets title teams you could easily establish that Hakeem was the Rockets best player. Therefore, the team ran through him and the system was designed to maximize his talents. Therefore, they made sure he had the most shots and surrounded him with solid perimeter defenders and shooters to compliment his dominant interior scoring and defense. Result: a championship team.

Now, let's look at the current Rockets and see if we can answer these questions.

1. Best Player: Steve Francis

While Hakeem and Charles might be more consistent in the meantime, no one can deny that the team will be built around Francis in the longterm.

2. What style?

We first must look at the talents that Francis brings to the table before we can answer this question. First, we would say that Francis is an excellent penetrator and particularly gifted in the open court. Secondly, we would say he is a gifted defender. Now, we need a style of basketball to compliment those talents. That style would have to include running to take advantage of his prowess in the open court and it would also include a defense that emphasizes pressure on the ball.

3. What players compliment his system?

First, these players must obviously be able to run with Francis, but more importantly, running must be their strength. This means that defense should be their strength as well. Pressuring the ball only works when you have two or three guys who can do it well. Then, you would need post players who are adept at running the floor and providing a shot blocking prescence if the pressure breaks down.

------------------
Rockets When? Rockets When?

[DAROckets]

Steve may have the most potential however he has a long way to go before he could be considered the "best" player on this team.

That IMO is still Dream.
Steve IMHO is still 2 year's away.

[Barzilla]

DARORockets,

We can either hold on for the next couple of years until Dream retires and hope he doesn't deteriorate any more or we can put the ball in the hands of a player who can only get better. Simply put, if our goal is to win an NBA chamionship then considering Dream the best player or "the franchise" won't get it done. I'm not sure how far Francis is away to tell you the truth. In the preseason I thought it would take two or three years, but this guy's learning curve is amazing. The point is that if you have to argue about who your best player is then you don't have a franchise player. San Antonio had that same problem before David stepped aside and gave the team to Duncan. Simarlarly, we won't truly know how good Francis can be until it is his team. We can quivel over how good he is now and how many games he will have like this last one, but the truth is that it doesn't really matter. If we go with Hakeem and Charles as the franchise we know we won't win. If we go with Francis as the franchise we know we won't win this year, but we also know we are better prepared for the future.

------------------
Rockets When? Rockets When?

[DAROckets]

I don't get why so many ppl think,that if we don't make Steve the focus of the team right away,than we are somehow going to ruin him or that he won't be able to reach his full potential.

I love the guy and think he will be a superstar one day,but I also belive he must first earn his place on this team before we turn it over to him.

There is no reason why he can't learn the NBA game first.

I also believe that if he is handed the reign's to early,and fail's that it could do alot of damage to his confidence.

[Barzilla]

DaroRockets,

I certainly respect your opinion and I understand the need for Steve to feel successful, but I have to disagree. Will Francis be ruined if we continue to run it through Charles and Hakeem? Probably not. What that well do is delay his progress. I have seen enough of a Francis to believe that he will be a very good point guard in addition to being a good scorer. I think the idea of "being a part of an NBA team" is not outside of his grasp. My point is that how will he test his limits if he plays a half court game where he throws it into the low posts? Success is part of the learning process, but so is failure. In order for this team to be a contender after Hakeem and Charles leave, Steve must have a firm grasp of his limitations and responsibilities. In college he could dominate anyone. In the NBA, no one can dominate everyone all the time. If Steve penetrates and gets his shot blocked (like he did continously against the Kings) then he will learn that he either needs to pass it before he gets under the basket or settle for the ten footer. If he turns it over by making a fancy pass to someone who isn't ready for it then he will learn to make the easy pass. The examples go on and on, but they are all he things we must go through before he joins the elite point guard class. If all he does his pass it to the post and sit outside for the three then he is nothing more than a Kenny Smith. With all due respect, Francis is much better than that and we won't win unless we maximize his talents.

------------------
Rockets When? Rockets When?

[thacabbage]

Barzilla:

I agree wholeheartedly with what you are saying and I have felt the same way myself for a long time. I think we should pattern this next team of ours after the Philadelphia 76ers. The team should be shouldered by the strength of the guard play and the defensive abilities of the big man.

If you look at our team right now, I think we have 3 peices of the future set in stone. The point guard (Francis), the 2 guard (Shandon Anderson), and the 1st big man (Cato). These players all fit the plan I want to follow. Anderson and Francis are both skilled defenders who thrive in the open court, and Cato is a dominant defensive big man who does not need touches in the low post. I would like to, sometime in the next few years, acquire a Theo Ratliff type of power forward. Someone to help Cato out with the dirty work down low, but also not demand touches. I also feel that Mobley will not be a part of our final product (in 3 years) and I think he should be traded this season. There are just too many guys out there (McGrady, Hughes, Finley) on the trade block for us to keep Mobley. I think he has pretty much leveled off as a player, and this is just about as good as he will ever get.

STEP 1:

Point Guard
Shooting Guard
Center

COMPLETE

STEP 2:

Trade any package of Mobley, Rogers, Drew, and Mack for small foward...

STEP 3:

Wait for Barkley and Hakeem to retire.
(while we still have them we need to be developing these new guys rather than running the same old D-I-T offense.)

I think that is the biggest thing holding us back right now. Rudy T staying with the D-I-T offense. Until he gets rid of that, we will make zero progress for the future.

[Barzilla]

Cabbage,

Thank you, I knew I wasn't the only one. Personally, I don't see much of a market for Mobley right now because of his salary situation. I've heard that the Warriors are looking to get rid of Erick Dampier, but we would almost have to include a Walt Williams and Mack or Bullard in order to make the salaries work. Of course we also have to consider Dampier's knee problems. I don't see this team making a huge deal before the deadline unless it makes sense. However, this is the scenerio I see working

Step 1

Francis
Anderson
Cato
Rogers (active bench player)

Completed

Step 2

Draft small forward (Terence Morris or Chris Porter)

If Detroit gives us their pick then we pick either an athletic power forward or another point guard or shooting guard depending on what is available

Step 3

Use the offseason to examine the market for Mobley, Williams, and Bullard. See if there is a veteran point guard available or a young power player.

Step 4

Have Hakeem work with Cato, Kenny Thomas, and other big man so they will be ready to play when he retires.

------------------
Rockets When? Rockets When?

[thacabbage]

Another player I would like to bring in is Jerome Williams of the Pistons. He is an excellent defender and garbageman type of player. Brings a lot of toughness.
I would be willing to give up Mobley for him.

Guys, it might sound harsh right now, but we are in a major transition period. I would be surprised if more than 3 players that are on our current roster are still there by mid-next year. Right now, what we need to do is make some good trades/wise free agent signings/good draft picks, bring in the type of players that we like and start building some chemistry. Enough of this throw-together a new team every summer and go for that last shot at a ring. We need to start from scratch and build up for the next 3-4 years and then become a contender.

<UL>
Francis - untouchable. The cornerstone of our franchise for the next 10-13 years.
Anderson - untouchable (because we promised him a big contract). He is an athletic shooting guard who fits in well with Francis. Good defender.
Cato - I am happy with Cato and there isnt a better young center prospect in the league, today. If a good deal came up, I wouldn't hesitate to give him up, but for now, I think he is safe.
Mobley - I think we need to trade him this season. Package him with Drew, Mack, Rogers, and TMass and try to go for a jackpot. Mobley is a good player, but will never be great. We need to look to add that one other special player to compliment Francis.
Rogers - I understand that a lot of people don't want to let him go, but you have to realize that he is a role player and if a good deal for a star came up, you have to make that deal. I think Carlos' value has risen, and I would look to package him in a deal for a building block.
Drew - He has had some good games...hopefully his value has risen. I would look to package him.
Mack - package him with the others.
TMass - another good role player who can be replaced. Package him with the others.
Walt Williams - He has always been thrown into big deals throughout his career. Hopefully he has enough value to be included in another one.
Hakeem - He really is slowing us down this season, but we can't trade him. That would be plain wrong...I doubt anyone would want him anyways.
Barkley - If he wanted to go to a contender, then sure, go for it. I think there is a pretty good market for Barkley this season. Some teams in the East might want to go for it all this season, and then next year have hordes of cap space (Indiana). I would certainly look to deal him if he asked...this could net a big peice of the puzzle.
[/list]

That's all I can think of for now. This season, and this summer, I think we need to focus on building the main peices of the puzzle. Cato, Anderson, and Francis are already set in stone. I would then try to package Mobley, Rogers, TMass, Drew, Mack, and Williams for something special. That's 4 peices. Our lottery pick would give us five. Then, over the next 3 years, we would have the basic foundation of starters set, but add role players to the mix as we go along (like the 94 Rockets added Elie, Maxwell, Horry to the Olajuwon-Thorpe unit). It is like a snowball gaining momentum and building up. We build chemistry amongst the starters, getting better every year, and add to the bench as we go along.

Well, that is my 3 year plan. I doubt Rudy's is anything like this. http://bbs.clutchcity.net/ubb/frown.gif

[Barzilla]

Cabbage,

Not sure I agree with trading Rogers. I think the main reason he has never been anything more than a role player is because people keep trading him around. That being said, I would generally agree with everything else you said. Being that as it may, I see the Rockets going in two possible directions.

1. Trade Mobley and the rest of those players for what you can get. Jerome Williams would be nice. Tim Thomas or Tracy Mcgrady would be fantastic. Then, draft the best possible 3-4-5 to compliment Cato and Olajuwon.

2. Trade Mobley and the rest for the best available big man and then draft the best 1-2-3 that you can find. The best thing about Francis and Anderson is that they have the type of size that makes them able to play multiple positions (Francis 1 and 2, Anderson 2 and 3). This would allow the Rockets to pick the best available perimeter player.



------------------
Rockets When? Rockets When?

[thacabbage]

Mmmm, indeed. We have a very flexible core. It's a tough choice, but I would go with whatever I get.

Seeing that the two best players in the draft are Porter and Morris, one would think that the best plan would be to trade Mobley for a big man.

But on the other hand, guys like McGrady and Hughes would make a good fit.

There are so many routes the Rockets can take. Trade for a center and move Cato to the 4, trade for Hughes and move Anderson to the 3. Trade for a 3 and draft a 4...the possibilities are endless. I would just take them as I go along. If a good deal comes along for a small forward, I don't hesitate to make it. I then worry about the draft later.

BTW: Brian Skinner is playing extremely well over in Clipper-land. So good, O'kandi might be available for the right price. An O'Kandi-Cato crop of big men would be nice to back up Francis and Anderson. Just another scenario they should look into.

[This message has been edited by thacabbage (edited November 27, 1999).]

[alaskansnowman]

you all say that mobley will not be a great player, but i dunno. u all know he has practiced like hell during the offseason, and i think that with his competetiveness and hard work ethic, there's nothing stopping him from becoming a great player. Not great as in Grant Hill great, but great as in Joe Dumars or somebody of his status. maybe u all are right, but i think that mobley can get better.

[Barzilla]

Alaskan,

Something has to give. Let's say we were to get lucky and be able to draft Terence Morris or Chris Porter. We would have Francis at the point, Anderson at the two, and the rookie at the three. This leaves Mobley still on the bench. Personally, I love the spark that he's giving us off the bench, but you have to know he and his agent are salivating after seeing the contract Cato got. We know Francis will get big money when his contract is up and we already know that Anderson probably has an under the table agreement when his contract is up. That means you would be paying three players near the max for two positions. We simply can't afford to do that. If we can find someone to take Williams and Bullard off our hands then they might demand Mobley as part of that package. At this point you can't expect to get anything of value unless we trade something of value. If we trade only Williams and Bullard (Mack) then we will only get another team's garbage. If you put in a quality player like Mobley you have a much better chance of actually getting a quality player at a position that we need (PF/C).

Cabbage,

I simply can't imagine Candy being available. The Clippers have never been known for their intelligence, but they've actually put together a pretty good little team over there. They are probably a solid point guard away from being a playoff team. My team would probably be the Warriors. Dampier appears to be available. If his knee checks out I would make that trade because they have also shown interest in Mack.

------------------
Rockets When? Rockets When?

[thacabbage]

Barzilla:

I understand. But you don't think Rogers+Mobes+TMass is enough to net him? Point guard is a far more pressing need for the Clippers than center is...and I also know they want depth.

I just think that the Rockets can't just sit around this season. There are too many young, talented future stars on the trading block. We need to make a move for the future with Mobley. And most importantly of all, Rudy must devise some sort of a long range plan. Every year, it seems like a fan is controlling the team.

. Oh, there's a good player, let's get him. Oh, Scottie Pippen's available, let's get him.

We need to have a clear-cut plan. What are we trying to accomplish? How long will it take to accomplish this? What do we need to accomplish this? What obstacles might stand in the way? How far are we?

Enough of this throwing together a new team every year for that last stand. We need to start thinking long term and develop some continuity. Our first step must be to bring in that next building block via Mobley. Go from there.

[Doctor Robert]

I go out of town for Thanksgiving and I miss all of the fun!

Cabbage, I agree, the "take the best player attitude" won't get you a championship. There has to be more behind our moves. I also agree that Step One is complete. Popeye would probably say something about the number of potential deals that fly across CD's table and that this prevents any other attitude, but a clear plan surely can't hurt.

A couple of thoughts on our current roster:
If Cato, Anderson, and Francis comprise 3/5ths of our future starting roster (which I believe they do) I believe that the two star rule comes into effect and that a prized free agent or exceptional draft pick needs to fill our 3 or 4 position. I'm not sure that Olowakandi can be that second star (career high 17 points, 3 assists), but I can't really hang with you guys who know more about the rest of the league than I do.

Since Cato and Anderson are primarily defensive minded players I think that we will need well rounded players at our other two starting positions for offense.

Also, a thought about Rodgers and why we shouldn't trade him:
I have heard him speak a few times recently and believe that the man has something between the ears to go with his 6'-11" SF body. In my book that is enough potential to hold on considering his current play. I wouldn't go so far as to say he will be a starter on our dream team, but he already is an excellent bench player who fits very well with what our future team needs.

[thacabbage]

Doc:

Agreed. You need to have two stars on your team to be successful in the NBA. I think three is too many, and one is hardly enough. Two is just right. Fill that around with capable guys who can step up their games when asked and to play a defined role. If we were to trade for Olowokandi, it wouldn't be to have him as our second star. I don't think he is that kind of player. Rather, I would have him as a strong defensive presence to compliment Cato and Anderson. Then, I would fill my "second star" need through the lottery draft pick.

[SmeggySmeg]

Cabbage,

I have one question, if Mobley is (or will be a) consistently a player who can score on anyone in the NBA, why trade him, why not trade the player who is keeping him out of the starting 5 because of a wink-wink, starting 5 and big contract later deal who is not performing like a starting SG.

Smeg

[UT Baller]

If the Rockets could swing a deal for Kandi and Nesby, then they should do it. The only apparent problem would be minutes. What was Catp's season high for minutes before Dream went down? 20? Rudy first has to get it through Hakeem's head that he is not going to be the focus of this team, Dream needs to take a page from the Admiral and hit the boards, block some shots, and start the break. Hakeem may be able to still dominate the Chumps of the league (Ostertag, Divac, Polynice) but he has become too inconsistent. I love Hakeem, he is my all time favorite player, but I think that his time has come and he should hang up his shoes. Back to the sublect of transactions, I would cream in my pants for Hughes or McGrady. The Kandi man and Nesby deal is all talk, but if a deal were possible then CD would be a fool not to take it.

[Barzilla]

Smeggy,

"If Mobley can score more than most players in the league then why move him?"

That's a pretty fair question and with deference to Cabbage I'll give my answers.

First, how much of that quote is propaganda and how much of it is fact? What we know is that Mobley has been much better after moving to the shooting guard slot. Anyone who thinks "well we can just move Francis to two guard and start Mobley at the point" isn't paying attention. However, even if he continues to average fifteen points a game that is hardly more than everyone else.

Secondly, even if he could score more than everyone else, there is more to basketball than scoring. If you have a player who can score 12-14 PPG (Anderson) and play tough defense against the opposition then he is more valuable then someone who can score 14-16 PPG (Mobley) and play so-so defense.

Therefore, while Mobley is a valuable player and the Rockets don't HAVE to trade him, but if the right deal comes up where they can get a small forward who can do what he does then you have to make it. Plus, you have to consider the contract situation Mobley will be in after the year.

Doctor Robert and Cabbage,

Picking the best player available is not necessarily a bad thing. It depends on the philosophy of the coach. Basically there are two types of coaches in all of sports. There are players coaches and systems coaches. Players coaches focus on the players. They form a system around the players based on the players talents. Pat Riley is a perfect example of this. He ran Showtime is LA because he had great open court players. In New York and Miami he played the Stone Age game where his players banged on you all night long because that was there strength. System coaches stick with the same system and try to find players who fit that system. Phil Jackson is a good example here. He runs the triangle no matter what. I think Rudy falls under this category. Therefore, the plan you discuss fits with Rudy because they need to evaluate every player who comes in to see if he fits with the post based offense. Therefore, acquiring Pippen, Anderson, and Francis is not necessarily a bad thing if we were a players team, but since it is a specific system it is a bad move. By the way, for those who consider Rudy inept just consider two things. First, nobody who has won two championships can be all that stupid. Secondly, there are a lot of systems coaches out there, so Rudy isn't necessarily inflexible as compared to his peers. The fact is that his talent doesn't match the system that he runs. Whether he can adapt or not remains to be seen, but he definetely isn't inept.



------------------
Rockets When? Rockets When?

[rocketsfan66]

I have finally gotten around to opposing
all this visionary stuff. As a fan, I am
very pleased with the Francis deal that
sidesteps some of the things that usually
happpen to a team like this one. Obtaining
Francis and some other young legs makes
it possible for the Rockets to do what
they do best: GM trading and shuffling.

Thacabbage amazes me most. How can
cabbage say all these things about running
and preparing for the future and then
say that even so next year we will only
have three people left from this year?

If there is anything we can be sure about
with the Rockets it's the big trade
and big free agent signing. You can
speculate all you want on developing
Francis, but we cannot assume that we will
not have other big name post players coming
here after CB and Hakeem.

I'm more with DAROckets. Francis will
earn his respect and lowering the bar
isn't going to help anything. Who knows
how far his game could go? We also should
not assume that there will be a 76ers
type game in the future. The trades are
just way too frequent.

Didn't the Portland and Sacramento games
prove that we should not be going with
a pure vision? We would be playing into
the hands of many teams that have been at
it longer. By the time we had enough experience with one of these visions,
we'd acquire another major piece that fits
another vision. There are too many teams
competing for the same thing for it to
be just a matter of vision and chemistry,
which is not to mention that you have to have
contracts long enough to be able to do it!

Here is one fan saying the Rockets
should still contend. Most teams would not
know when the next chance they would have
the equivalent of CB and Hakeem. True,
many in the West can beat up on that
combination, but a major development of
Francis, Cato or maybe Mobley or someone
else is much more feasible than expecting
a long-term vision to work out. Just
look how much stars move around these days!

[thacabbage]

Barzilla:

You bring up some excellent points....

Mobley: I have agreed with you here. We can't just have a, "No, Mobley is good, let's keep him" attitude. We need to look at this from all angles. Cuttino Mobley has been improving this season, that is a fact. If he continues to play at the pace he has set over the last 3 games, then he will become a hot commodity in the NBA. Already, he is well-known. I read somewhere the other day, some Rockets game preview with matchup breakdowns: "Cuttino Mobley can score on anyone in the NBA...". This will only continue to grow as he puts up similar performances. We have to understand that this summer, there are a lot of teams scrapping down there rosters for a shot at Taylor, Duncan, Hill, McGrady, Rose and the like. Once the dust settles, there will still be a lot of teams who weren't able to bank in on one of those guys. Mobley is a free agent and would make a nice consolation prize. Anderson and Francis are our guards for atleast the next 5 years. That is a fact, no going around that. They are locked in. Imagine you are Cat Mobley. Now let's say the Toronto Raptors come calling to you with a nice 8 year, $70 million deal, a chance to start in the backcourt, and make the most of your abilities on this upcoming team. Or would you rather stay on the Rockets for the same amount of money, play for an upcoming team, but know that you will never be a starter with Anderson-Francis. 9-10 times [maybe more] you're going to want to start. We have to accept this and take action now. There are a lot of guys on the trading block this season and we need to look into some of them.

Dampier: Never...it would be a huge mistake. He has decent skills, but his contract is outrageous. He makes somewhere in the vicinity of $6-7 mill a year. Disgusting.

Olowakandi: Believe it. Just about everyone in the NBA is available for the right price. The only untouchables on that Clipper team are Odom and Derek Anderson. What the Clippers need is depth. Basically, with an injured Mo Taylor, their roster consists of Odom, Anderson, Skinner, Nesby, and O'kandi. The rest is absolute trash. I know for a fact that they realize this and are looking to acquire some depth. Guys like TMass, Williams, and Carlos Rogers are all solid NBA players who could add that. O'kandi is available at the right price...trust me on this one. Skinner has been playing well at center, and they badly need depth. I would try to push a:

Rogers+TMass+Williams+Mobley
for
Olowakandi+Nesby+trash (cap fillers)

This sets the Clippers backcourt in stone with Mobley and Derek Anderson. They add themselves some depth in Rogers, TMass, and Williams. They give up O'kandi (but they still have Skinner) and Nesby (who can be replaced by Williams+Rogers). They will be happy to unload the trash. Basically, they trade 2 for 4, adding depth and quality in the process.

The deal would make a whole lotta sense for the Rockets. Nesby is the type of player we need at small forward. An athletic runner who can play alongside Anderson and Francis. Olowakandi adds us depth for our depleted frontline. A deal like this may be enough to boost us back into the thick of things. If we don't make the playoffs, then fine...we can use our lottery pick to draft a quality swing player. Then, head into the future with a defensive twin towers of Cato and Olowakandi. Nesby is the 6th man, and the draft pick gives you your small forward.

After year 1, you now have your 6 major peices of the puzzle fitted. Well on schedule..

[This message has been edited by thacabbage (edited November 28, 1999).]

[This message has been edited by thacabbage (edited November 28, 1999).]

[Francis3]

Olawakandi is a sorry player. He has no game.

[thacabbage]

Olawakandi is a sorry player. He has no game.

That sure was easy, wasn't it? http://bbs.clutchcity.net/ubb/smile.gif

Francis3: He is very raw right now, but he has a lot of physical talent. I think under the right tutelage (sp.) he can develop into a valuable player. Already in his young career, he has shown a good rebounding ability.

[Barzilla]

Cabbage,

Don't get me wrong, I would love to have Candy if he is available, but I'm not sure that he is. Right now the Clippers have to look at their situation like the Rockets are: who do we keep and who do we trade. Right now I look at the big man situation a lot like our three guard situation. I think Candy has more long range potential than Skinner, so they might be more willing to trade Skinner with "trade the hotter commodity theory". I just think Candy is developing too much for them to want to give up on him. Don't get me wrong though, I'd love to have him.

------------------
Rockets When? Rockets When?

[Achebe]

cabbage:

i'm not sure why 'kandi hasn't flourished playing for the clippers (he's certainly a good rebounder) but i have to wonder how long it will take for him to develop into something greater than... a good rebounder

for example, you mentioned tmass, mobley and rogers in a trade; a trade of mobley & rogers seems to raise the most concern to posters, but when you compare tmass and 'kandi it gets interesting also---

career highs:

tmass v. 'kandi
Career Points: 34 v. 17 advantage TMass
Offensive Boards: 11 v. 8 advantage TMass
Defensive Boards: 13 v. 12 advantage TMass
Blocks: 4 v. 6 advantage Kandi

obviously, this is a bit misleading, since tmass has played in the nba for 8-9 years; however, 'kandi played for the clippers as their #1 pick... there is no reason for him to not have exceeded expectations, which he hasn't up until this point. how long will it take for him to develop? the jury's out, particularly since he's not the best player on his team (perhaps the 3rd/4th best?)

right now, i'll always go w/ the berzerker mentality of a mobley or tmass, which as 2nd rounders seem to show much more gumption than 'kandi. have you ever doubted for a moment watching tmass play, that he is going to give every ounce of his soul to the rockets?

as far as rogers, forget about it-- he's only limited by rudy's rotation.

[thacabbage]

The Olowokandi talk was pure speculation on my part. I would much rather make a run at some of the swing players on the block at this time.

[Achebe]

cab,

i hope you're not just doing the duck & cover to protect this trade http://bbs.clutchcity.net/ubb/smile.gif

a story about odom on nbatalk gave some insight into 'kandi's future when it talked about how sterling has made generic monetary promises to odom. add that to the notion that the clippers don't have the personnel to take 'kandi's skills from 'role player' to 'superstar' (and a certain team that thinks of itself as having all of the tools to harvest a post up player: cd, dream, etc.) and we get to see motion in action. sterling has to move 'kandi fairly soon before his value (as a #1 pick) dwindles. he's not the clipper's primary interest, and they certainly won't pay the big man his due on potential alone.

[thacabbage]

SmeggySmegg:

I don't think he can or ever will consistently be able to score on everyone in the league. I was just reporting that as something I read the other day to show that people around the league feel that Mobes has talent. The Anderson vs. Mobley question has been raised in many threads. Personally, I feel much better when Anderson is in the game rather than Mobley. He is a much more productive/efficient player. If the shot isn't there, he isn't going to take it. He doesn't need the ball to score. He can go up and get his own shots - in transition, loose balls/rebounds. He is also a superior defender. Once again, don't think I don't like Mobley. I love the guy and wish we could keep him. But at this point, it would just be stupid not to trade him. One can clearly see we are in the midst of re-shaping this team, and we have so many needs and their are so many young players available on the block. What is the point of holding on to a guy who:
*you already have a player who is better than him at the same position.
*will probably leave after this season.

UT Baller:

No, I am not aware of what is being discussed. Take all of this as a I think the Rockets need to do this.. type of thing, from me. Not a the Rockets are doing this.... Sorry for any confusion. I wouldn't want nbatalk.com reporting a Olowokandi-Mobley rumor which they found off of some Rockets web site... http://bbs.clutchcity.net/ubb/smile.gif

Rocketsfan66:

Thacabbage amazes me most. How can
cabbage say all these things about running
and preparing for the future and then
say that even so next year we will only
have three people left from this year?

It is because I want to build for the future. What is the point of building around a team if you don't like the team as it is right now. Personally, when I look at our roster right now, there are only a few guys who I think will/should be on the finished product in 3 years. Does that mean I don't like the other players? No, it means that I think it would be better off if they were traded to bring in talent that fits our needs and what we are trying to do right now. Then, once you have that team set, place that roster in stone and develop chemistry with those guys for the next few years.

Achebe:

You are right. Olowokandi hasn't done 'jack' yet and his numbers look like crap. Still, I have seen good physical ability out of him and I think that the same staff and environment that developed Othella Harrington into a 20-10 man could do the same with O'kandi who has better athletic/physical capabilities. It would give us two defensive powers in the frontcourt in Cato and Okandi. Once again, I would look at this as one of our last resorts. I would much rather make a run at some of the swing players who are available right now.

[tod the bod]

While I generally agree with all of you, I think that if the Rockets emphasize the guard position so much, they might end up like the Nets. The Nets have a lot of talented guards and small forwards, but they have no low-post presence on offense. Consequently, the Nets need to hit all of their jump shots in order to win. They don't hit the shots, they don't win. The Rockets, on first glance, appear to be as bad an outside shooting team as the Nets.

While I think that the Rockets currently focus too much on their low-post game, I think that the Rockets need to have one very good offensive post-up player. While I agree with you both that Cato and Rogers are very good role players, neither have any capability to be a dominant post-up force. Both of these guys should get the majority of their points off of offensive rebounds.

Consequently, the Rockets should not count on a future with having Cato start at center and Rogers start at power forward. I would keep Cato as my center and try to trade for or draft a big power forward.

Its funny, the team that I would like to see over the next couple of years is

Francis PG
Anderson SG
Mack SF
the aforementioned dominant power forward
Cato C

I think that Mack is a better shooter than the Wizard so that is who I would look to keep.

I would trade Mobely, Rogers, and Williams for this power forward.

[thacabbage]

Tod:

Rather than Mack, the small forward could be our draft pick this year..(?)

I really can't think of any dominant big man scorers who we could trade for. There are defensive presences like Jerome Williams and Michael Olowokandi (both who I would give up Rogers and Mobes for), but I can't think of any offensive guys who would be that easy to trade for. Any suggestions...

[SmeggySmeg]

Barzilla and Cab

Your arguments are sound and as a coach myself I understand there is more than scoring to being a good player but the stats say our starting SG Mr Anderson is averaging 8 pts a game (mobes is at 13ppg), which in my mind is unacceptable in the NBA, well it would be unacceptable in most leagues, all in all if something good is offer I would trade either of them, but right Mobes should be starting.

Smeg

[Barzilla]

Visionary detrators,

My mind is ablaze with all these different arguments. First of all, let me address the two obvious points y'all made.

1. How can you form a vision when the Rockets continually wheel and deal?

This is a great point, but fails to see the fact that we are fans and have no real impact on the situation. I think what everyone is doing is playing "If we were in control". We're simply doing the same thing. That being a given, I would definetely agree with your sentiments on the fact that we do need a plan.

2. Why should the Rockets seek their vision against teams who are obviously better at it?

This gets to the crux of the argument of the visionaries. This team will not be built in a day or even a season. Obviously teams like Seattle, Phoenix, and Sacramento will have the upper hand when we run today. Running today though can only help us run tommorrow though. I realize the first question is a part of this one. My answer still stands. Formulate a vision first, then find the parts to make it work later.

------------------
Rockets When? Rockets When?

[thacabbage]

1. How can you form a vision when the Rockets continually wheel and deal?

I think Clutch answered this best when the question was posed to him about a week ago in the 100+ thread. The Rockets need to build around a group and form a vision. They must wheel and deal to get to that select group because this core is not what we want for the future. A half-ass like Walt Williams is not what I want in the vision. Then, after they have gathered that select group that they are happy with, then you stop dealing and build chemistry around those guys.

[This message has been edited by thacabbage (edited November 29, 1999).]

[Barzilla]

Cabbage,

You have just hit the nail on the head of the entire visionary argument. This is where the coaching philosophy comes in. Here are a number of pointed questions (ruthless as Doctor Robert would say) to help us find our way.

1. Is the post based offense itself outdated or do we simply not have the parts to make it work?

We know we don't have the parts to make it work when we see anyone and everyone throwing up bricks from beyond the arc. However, has this offense become the "run and shoot" of basketball where defenses have learned to expose its weaknesses or do we simply need different personel to execute it properly?

2. If the post offense is flawed, is Rudy capable of going in a different direction?

Rudy is a fantastic coach who has helped give this city two titles. However, we have to understand that he has been in a post dominated offense for 30 years (Player, scout, assistant, head coach). With that in mind, it is easy to see why he leans towards making adjustments rather than changing styles.

3. If Rudy is incapable of changing and the system is flawed when/if do we talk about finding a replacement?

I don't know on this one. This is obviously a touchy subject. How much leeway has Rudy earned? I have a feeling that if this team continues to struggle Rudy will take care of this himself. Do we do it this offseason? Next? Play it out until Rudy wants to leave?

4. Should we decide to get another coach, do we look for the "best possible candidate" or decide what style we should play based on the personel and pick a coach who specializes in that style?

This is another tough question. If you are a trust the coach sort of person you would favor highering the best possible candidate. If you are a formulate the vision around the talent kind of person you will let that be your guide.

5. If you formulate the vision first then do you go ahead with roster moves before he arrives or do you let him pick his people (this is particularly important with the draft)?

Another tough one, as Bill Parcell's said, "If someone asks you to cook a meal you will always feel more comfortable if they let you pick the ingredients." Of course, on the other hand, if your picking a college coach or first time coach you may not feel comfortable leaving the draft in his hands.

If you can excuse my ramblings for the time being let me use an analogy to illustrate why we simply can't make the deals to bring in the players and then formulate a vision.

Let's say you want to take a trip. Would you pick your mode of transportation before you decided where to go? Of course not, that would be stupid. If you wanted to go to Europe you can't take a car. If you wanted to go thirty miles away it would make no sense for you to fly.

Planning the future of your franchise is a similar deal. You simply cannot make any MAJOR decisions until you answer the questions I posed above. What if you made two or three major deals and then brought in a coach with power to make personel moves? He may not like the guys you brought in. What if you made the decision to run and then decide that Mike Fratello is your man? It starts with the vision. This doesn't necessarily mean that you can't make changes before the deadline, but you have to have some idea of what your destination is so that the move will be in line with the vision.

------------------
Rockets When? Rockets When?